Recommend a decent low light dslr body.

Danny_Two

Danny_Two

Suspended / Banned
Messages
828
Edit My Images
No
Im a after an entry/mid level dslr with a reputation for good low light/high ISO results. Ive heard Nikon have the edge, but I don't want this to turn into a Canon/Nikon bun fight.
:)

Ideally something a couple of years old that's come down in price, say sub £400, used or new. Doesn't need to be all singing, all dancing, just something reliable with good ISO to compliment my G1.

Throw some names at me so I can do some research.

Cheers.
 
My suggestion would be the Canon 450D as it's the only DSLR camera I have experience with. :D

Max ISO is only 1600 but very little noise. I got mine for around £330 a few months back but it's possibly cheaper now.
 
You may find a camera with max iso1600 a bit limiting.....I did. After a bit of research I went for a Canon 50D (I already has Canon lenses) bought secondhand off this forum. This seemed to me to give a good compromise between price and performance and good for action shots. I have not been disappointed.

My research indicated that full-frame cameras probably have better low light performance at high ISO but I wanted the extra reach of a crop sensor for action sports.

I had a Canon 400D before and whilst I found this gave good results in normal light, I found it limiting in low light situations.
 
Nikon D5000 (low end)
Nikon D7000 (middle)
Nikon D700 (upper)
Nikon D3s (top)
 
In the Canon range, I'd go with something with a DIGIC IV processor - probably the 500D as it appears to be slightly better at higher ISOs than the 550D. They certainly seem to be better than similar cameras with DIGIC IIIs. The 450D isn't brilliant on high ISO - IMHO the 5Dmk2 @ ISO3200 is cleaner than the 450D @ ISO800 (I have both here to compare). Google for 500D 550D ISO performance and see some comparative reviews.

DPReview is also a good place to look as they always to ISO/noise tests with comparable cameras.
 
Arkady said:
Nikon D5000 (low end)
Nikon D7000 (middle)
Nikon D700 (upper)
Nikon D3s (top)
Click to expand...

Good luck at getting any of those for less than £400 used (apart from the D5000, which will have the same noise levels as any of the other entry level cameras), perhaps reading the post might help, nikon robot! ;) (all in jest of course!)

OP, your budget makes it difficult to get a truely low noise camera at this level. Your mony will get you a 40D from Canon, which I have experience of using up to H (iso 3200) but I wouldn't recommend it! Well exposed piccies at iso 1600 are usually fine. If you picked up a kit lens or 50mm f1.8 2nd hand you might get in on your budget. Below that your money will get you a 450D but I have no experience of that.

Nikon wise, it looks like your budget would get a D5000 or D80. Hopefully a user could help you with noise levels on those!

I do think you may have trouble getting a camera with good low noise at high iso within budget, sorry!
 
Last edited:
Another vote for the 500d, I think it's a geat camera and it doen't seem to struggle to much at iso 3200
 
Maybe I should just stick to the G1 and the mini tripod.
:lol:

Ill have a read up on the Nikon D5000/ Canon's, see what they say on dp review.
Cheers all.
 
The Sony a450 and a550 are pretty decent in low light, as is the Canon 40D. Most older Nikons are poor high ISO performers, although the newer models seem to have left Canon standing. I'd recommend a D90 if you could stretch another 100 pounds...it's excellent at higher ISO work. Cheaper option might be a 30D.
 
menthel said:
Good luck at getting any of those for less than £400 used (apart from the D5000, which will have the same noise levels as any of the other entry level cameras), perhaps reading the post might help, nikon robot! ;) (all in jest of course!)

OP, your budget makes it difficult to get a truely low noise camera at this level. Your mony will get you a 40D from Canon, which I have experience of using up to H (iso 3200) but I wouldn't recommend it! Well exposed piccies at iso 1600 are usually fine. If you picked up a kit lens or 50mm f1.8 2nd hand you might get in on your budget. Below that your money will get you a 450D but I have no experience of that.

Nikon wise, it looks like your budget would get a D5000 or D80. Hopefully a user could help you with noise levels on those!

I do think you may have trouble getting a camera with good low noise at high iso within budget, sorry!
Click to expand...

Sorry - you're quite right to pull me up on that one - the implication (unwritten) was that within his budget he's out of luck...

Find more money.
 
Arkady said:
Sorry - you're quite right to pull me up on that one - the implication (unwritten) was that within his budget he's out of luck...

Find more money.
Click to expand...

No probs. We can always see what we can do within his budget though.

grum said:
What's the 5D Mark I like at higher ISOs? I know it's also a little over budget.
Click to expand...

Not that great from people's experience here. The sensor is rather old tech and its nowhere near the mk II. It would also be way overbudget with lenses too.
 
The 5D mk 1 is a fantastic high ISO performer with brilliant results at ISO 1600, and still way better than any crop camera (even the new Pentax k5). If you can stretch to the extra 250 quid then that would be my.number one choice :) I love using it indoors at ISO 1600.
 
mithrandir said:
OP - What will you be snapping under low light?
Click to expand...

Street stuff mainly, so fairly lit already. I was out with the G1 last night and was experimenting with the ISO at 1600, but it was too noisy. I normally just use a mini tripod, but was thinking how much easier it would be if I could get away with hand held.
Im also interested to compare a true dslr with micro four thirds.
 
manualfocus-g said:
The 5D mk 1 is a fantastic high ISO performer with brilliant results at ISO 1600, and still way better than any crop camera (even the new Pentax k5). If you can stretch to the extra 250 quid then that would be my.number one choice :) I love using it indoors at ISO 1600.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that! Its nice to know that the 5D can perform so well!
 
With your limited budget most of the suggestions are out of reach, a new 500D isn't, ok its slightly over for the body, but only slightly.

Yes the 550D has better noise handling at high ISO's, but theres not that much in it, whilst its a step above the earlier models in both range and its abilities at handling high ISO shots.

I'm happy to shoot at ISO 1600 with mine and often shoot at ISO 3200 as well.
Team it with fast glass, ie the 50mm/85mm F1.8 or an F2.8 zoom for best results, I wouldn't bother with the kit lens at all (I didn't either) just slap a nifty fifty on it to start with and go from there.
 
mithrandir said:
My suggestion would be the Canon 450D as it's the only DSLR camera I have experience with. :D

Max ISO is only 1600 but very little noise. I got mine for around £330 a few months back but it's possibly cheaper now.
Click to expand...

As a former 450D user (now 550D) my advice is buy Nikon. The Canons are great for what I do with them (mostly stalk cute little furry animals in broad daylight) but if half what I've heard about Nikons is true you are better off going in that direction.
 
alexhcowley said:
As a former 450D user (now 550D) my advice is buy Nikon. The Canons are great for what I do with them (mostly stalk cute little furry animals in broad daylight) but if half what I've heard about Nikons is true you are better off going in that direction.
Click to expand...

Not within the OP's budget...
 
I have a 5D mk I and find it excellent in low-light. Generally my father (who shoots 5D2 and 7D, and has owned 50D, 40D, 20D and 5D1 also) and I (now shoot 5D1, have owned 20D and D30) find that the 5D and 5D2 files need much less work out of the camera than APS-C bodies, particularly on noise reduction.

I tend to trot this picture out fairly often as an example of what can be done in low-light with 5D1 - ISO1600, 1.3 seconds, 24-105 F4L IS, no tripod: http://www.askisaac.com/images/fire/firecar1.jpg

Note the burned-out lights on the car are not the headlamps but the sidelights, and the lighting on the front of the car was not flash but rather light projected by an approaching car's headlamps.

However, as good or bad as people may think the 5D is, it is well outside of the OP's stated budget. I would suggest that the EOS 500D is worth a look - it's closer to budget than a 550D will be, and from the crops on dpr offers good usability to ISO3200, with ISO6400 and 12800 offered for use in a pinch (for situations where a grainy, noisy image is preferable to none). The Nikon D5000 seems to offer similar high-ISO image quality, although offers less detail at lower ISO settings. The GF1 can be compared directly to the 500D in the GF1 review on dpr.
 
Pentax K-x is within budget and supposed to have excellent high ISO performance.
 
Pentax K-X from SRS in Watford will set you back £385 at the moment. It has excellent high ISO performance and is a nice light SLR.
 
the sony a550`s iso peaks at 12.800:thumbs:
 
The Nikon 5000 has outstanding iso performance for an entry-level camera. There is simply no comparison between Nikon's proper entry-level D3000/D60 (up to 800 with reasonable noise) and the D5000 (up to 3200 with reasonable noise). That'd be my suggestion.
 
dunno,never used it that high :)
 
The A550 seems to broadly match the 500D - good results up to 3200ISO, and higher settings for emergencies only.

Basically, the A550, K-x, D5000 and 500D/550D are all capable of good results up to ISO3200. Buy the one you like the best and enjoy.
 
If you can find the extra dosh then I'll also recommend the 5D. Fantastic low light performance and full-frame as well. :)
 
Danny_Two said:
Street stuff mainly, so fairly lit already. I was out with the G1 last night and was experimenting with the ISO at 1600, but it was too noisy. I normally just use a mini tripod, but was thinking how much easier it would be if I could get away with hand held.
Im also interested to compare a true dslr with micro four thirds.
Click to expand...

It seems there to be so many suggestions over your budget. I reckon a D3000 or 450D are more than capable. Might be a good idea to check out some shots in the gallery or Flickr groups.
 
mithrandir said:
It seems there to be so many suggestions over your budget. I reckon a D3000 or 450D are more than capable. Might be a good idea to check out some shots in the gallery or Flickr groups.
Click to expand...
This is true. I doubt you can get an a55/500d/550d/d5000 with lens for around £400.

But going back to the Pentax K-x it is within budget (£399 from Comet with a kit lens), has two stops more ISO than the d3000 and three stops more than the 450d, and also looks good at high ISO.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/%28appareil1%29/639|0/%28appareil2%29/185|0/%28appareil3%29/623|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Pentax/%28brand2%29/Canon/%28brand3%29/Nikon
 
Personally think you are into moon on a stick territory for your budget

I'm never great at seeing noise in pictures, but even I can see the deterioration once the iso gets cranked up on the older/cheaper cameras
Doesn't matter how high it can go, its whether its any use, bit like the amp in Spinal Tap that went up to 11 instead of 10, its just a figure

Also wouldn't you want a faster lens to make the most of the low light capability which only makes it a more costly exercise?
 
Last edited:
All good points, im probably fooling myself in thinking that buying a different cheap camera will make everything rosy. Ill probably have a think about going full slr or just make the most of what Ive got.

Cheers.
 
Danny_Two said:
All good points, im probably fooling myself in thinking that buying a different cheap camera will make everything rosy. Ill probably have a think about going full slr or just make the most of what Ive got.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

As you rightly surmise, if you get 'another' cheap camera, you'll be wanting to upgrade in no time at all...a pointless exercise IMO...

Think about asking for cash donations this Xmas...
 
Danny_Two said:
All good points, im probably fooling myself in thinking that buying a different cheap camera will make everything rosy. Ill probably have a think about going full slr or just make the most of what Ive got.

Cheers.
Click to expand...
Except that you're coming from an 4/3 sensor, which is inherently smaller and noisier than the APS-C systems you're asking about, so the improvement will be noticeable. Obviously you're not going to get FF performance (although what the K-5 and to a lesser extent D7000 seems to be doing is fairly incredible albeit out of your price range) but you will notice a significant difference.

And - I promise this will be the last time I mention it in this thread - the K-x does what you want for the money you have. Go to the conclusion page on dpreview and compare your G1 to K-x paying attention to the difference in the 'Low light / high ISO performance' line. Then look at the K-x review where they say:

"While the image quality at base ISO is generally very good, what we were really surprised about (in a good way) is the K-x's performance in low light. Up to very high sensitivities the Pentax output shows a very good balance between noise reduction and the retention of fine detail in JPEGs (raw output is similar to other cameras in its class). The K-x approach: leaning heavily on chroma noise with more lenient handling of luminance noise results in images with grainy, almost film-like noise characteristics, that show very good detail up to the very highest sensitivities. The K-x is surprisingly a lot better better in low light than its bigger brother K-7, and is no doubt one of the currently best performing APS-C cameras in low light."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top